Justin Discount Boots is associated with an $800,000 partial-building reconstruction project as the family-operated retailer marks 50 years in business.
A Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation registration identifies the project as “Justin Discount Boots – Partial Building Reconstruction.” The approved state record establishes the project description and cost, but it does not establish that the store will close to customers.
The distinction matters for shoppers and for a business with three retail buildings in Justin. The filing concerns a partial-building reconstruction; it is not an approved announcement of a new store, an expansion or a campus-wide rebuilding project.
A project involving a 50-year Justin retailer
On its official website, Justin Discount Boots says it opened in 1976 and remains operated by the Wallace family. The retailer says it is celebrating 50 years in business.
That history gives the $800,000 registration local significance beyond the project amount. The work is associated with a retailer that describes a half-century of operations in Justin and continued family management.
The two sources answer different parts of the story. The state registration documents the reconstruction project. The retailer documents the business’s age, ownership, current shopping information and unusual three-building arrangement.
Neither source connects the reconstruction to a 50th-anniversary expansion. The timing overlaps the anniversary year, but the approved records do not say the project was commissioned to mark that milestone.
The store operates across three buildings
Justin Discount Boots says its three buildings span more than 90,000 square feet in total and house different merchandise departments. That layout is important because the project is described only as a partial-building reconstruction.
The approved state record does not identify which of the three buildings is involved. It also does not identify a merchandise department affected by the work. Shoppers should not assume that all three buildings, or any particular department, are included.
The company’s description of the campus and the filing’s limited scope can be read together without overstating either one: a substantial reconstruction is registered for a business spread across three buildings, but the available record does not map that work to a specific building.
Similarly, the retailer’s statement that the buildings contain different departments explains why a building-level answer would be useful to customers. The approved material does not supply that answer, so no department can be reliably described as relocated, closed or under construction.
Current address and regular shopping hours
The retailer lists its address as 101 N. FM 156 in Justin. Its posted regular hours are 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
Those are the only approved customer-facing hours for this article. The project record does not announce temporary construction hours, alternate entrances, department moves or closure dates.
Until the retailer posts different instructions, the official site remains the source for its listed address and regular schedule. The existence of a reconstruction filing by itself does not change those published hours.
Customers planning a visit should also distinguish current operating information from the construction project. The website describes how and when the retailer ordinarily operates; the filing documents planned physical work. Neither approved source says that one supersedes the other.
What the $800,000 filing does not show
The project title provides one meaningful boundary: it says “partial-building,” not replacement of the full three-building campus. Beyond that description and the $800,000 amount, the approved evidence leaves several practical questions unanswered.
There is no supported notice of a customer closure. There is no identified building or department, no announced temporary location and no statement that merchandise will be moved between buildings. The record also does not describe the project as additional retail space.
Those gaps prevent the filing from being presented as an expansion. Reconstruction can be reported because that is the project’s registered description; a claim about more shopping space, a redesigned campus or anniversary-driven growth would go beyond the supplied evidence.
The same caution applies to the project cost. The $800,000 figure belongs to the registered reconstruction. It should not be described as the value of the business, the cost of the entire campus or an investment covering all three buildings.
Why the combined record is useful
Without the retailer’s account, the filing would say little about the place affected. Justin Discount Boots supplies the missing local context: a business founded in 1976, still run by the Wallace family, operating more than 90,000 square feet across three department-based buildings.
Without the state registration, the anniversary and campus description would not establish a reconstruction project. Together, the sources show why the filing is notable while keeping its limits visible.
The clearest takeaway is that a major partial-building project is registered at a long-running Justin retailer during its 50th year. The evidence does not yet tell shoppers whether the work will affect visits, hours or access to any department.
For now, customers can use the published 101 N. FM 156 address and Monday-through-Saturday schedule. Any construction-related change would require information beyond the current registration and the retailer’s presently supplied details.
